Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

nekom:Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

Yes, but I thought there was a THC pill already on the market. Besides, for some medical conditions the hazard of smoking is kind of irrelevant.

vpb:Yes, but I thought there was a THC pill already on the market. Besides, for some medical conditions the hazard of smoking is kind of irrelevant.

Marinol, I believe. And I agree, in the case of a terminally ill patient, smoke away. But for an otherwise healthy person suffering from glaucoma, non-terminal cancer who need the appetite boost, etc. it's a bit safer. I support both medical and responsible recreational use among adults, but I can't say that smoking any substance is "safe".

Revek:If it exist, someone wants to have exclusive right to gouge you for it.

And they want legal protections from the government and they want the government to go after competitors, such as marijuana growers. And with any luck it'll be addictive and have tons of withdrawal side effects.

ZAZ:That's the risk of pretending medical marijuana is about medical marijuana. Somebody might take you at your word and produce medical marijuana.

For some, it is. I have known people who used it medically who would have never used it otherwise, and I can honestly affirm that it was a great help to them. Yes, there are those who also use it as a pretext for recreational use. I happen to support both, so this doesn't bother me at all, except maybe that it can serve to undermine the legitimate medical use in the court of public opinion.

nekom:. And I agree, in the case of a terminally ill patient, smoke away. But for an otherwise healthy person suffering from glaucoma, non-terminal cancer who need the appetite boost, etc. it's a bit safer. I support both medical and responsible recreational use among adults, but I can't say that smoking any substance is "safe".

Counter: If they are hvaing trouble keeping food down, how the fark is a pill going to help? They're going to throw that up too!

nekom:Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

No, this isn't true. Marijuana smoke does not cause cancer, heart disease or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Not a single case of any of these smoking related-disease has ever been linked to marijuana use. A few studies have found some minor airway changes in the lungs after years of heavy pot smoking, but these changes are fully reversible. Quite to the contrary, marijuana is a mild bronchodilator, which can help asthmatics breath easier without the cardiovascular side effects.

nekom:vpb:Yes, but I thought there was a THC pill already on the market. Besides, for some medical conditions the hazard of smoking is kind of irrelevant.

Marinol, I believe. And I agree, in the case of a terminally ill patient, smoke away. But for an otherwise healthy person suffering from glaucoma, non-terminal cancer who need the appetite boost, etc. it's a bit safer. I support both medical and responsible recreational use among adults, but I can't say that smoking any substance is "safe".

Anecdotally, Marino isn't as good at stimulating hunger and relieving pain as good ol' Sour Diesel. IIRC, it isn't prescribed for pain relief, or it wasn't when I had a work friend going through chemo. Then again, she liked to smoke up a bit before she got sick, so who knows? All I know is, marijuana shouldbe legal. There's no good, compelling rreason it shouldn't be.

nekom:Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

Many medicinal users opt to ingest, rather than inhale. This according to a provider in Montana I spoke with, YMMV. In fact, it was a majority of his customers that preferred it in an digestible form. He was, of course, talking about people that were seriously ill, and not people taking it for "anxiety".

So, if there are enantiomers of the active compounds present in the natural plant, or unidentified compounds that are active or act additively/synergistically, ingestion of preparations of real plants is still better than a pill.

/Nice try, big pharma//Why don't you get working on treatments for MRSA?

ZAZ:That's the risk of pretending medical marijuana is about medical marijuana. Somebody might take you at your word and produce medical marijuana.

Right, because big Pharma is just going to take "the word" of the medical marijuana community. There was no science involved, and no testing to see if there really are medical benefits. They just decided to perpetuate the ruse.

JackieRabbit:nekom: Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

No, this isn't true. Marijuana smoke does not cause cancer, heart disease or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Not a single case of any of these smoking related-disease has ever been linked to marijuana use. A few studies have found some minor airway changes in the lungs after years of heavy pot smoking, but these changes are fully reversible. Quite to the contrary, marijuana is a mild bronchodilator, which can help asthmatics breath easier without the cardiovascular side effects.

Smoking it used to make my heart pound at an alarming rate, and make my ears ring. I was young so I ignored it, naturally. I wouldn't touch it now, if it were legal.

ZAZ:That's the risk of pretending medical marijuana is about medical marijuana. Somebody might take you at your word and produce medical marijuana.

Stop the madness :)

"However, the issue of whether to allow patients to use potentially addictive drugs (ones they find pleasurable) is a question for public policy" - I guess they might as well use those non-addictive painmeds like they oxys and whatnot. Nope, not potentially addictive.

born_yesterday:nekom: Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

Many medicinal users opt to ingest, rather than inhale. This according to a provider in Montana I spoke with, YMMV. In fact, it was a majority of his customers that preferred it in an digestible form. He was, of course, talking about people that were seriously ill, and not people taking it for "anxiety".

So, if there are enantiomers of the active compounds present in the natural plant, or unidentified compounds that are active or act additively/synergistically, ingestion of preparations of real plants is still better than a pill.

/Nice try, big pharma//Why don't you get working on treatments for MRSA?

The stench is what gets to me. It hurts my eyes and makes me cough, and that's just second-hand. I won't be trying it first-hand when it has that effect on me from a distance.There are probably people like me out there, but with medical conditions that benefit from marijuana. This can only be good for them.

born_yesterday:nekom: Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

Many medicinal users opt to ingest, rather than inhale. This according to a provider in Montana I spoke with, YMMV. In fact, it was a majority of his customers that preferred it in an digestible form. He was, of course, talking about people that were seriously ill, and not people taking it for "anxiety".

So, if there are enantiomers of the active compounds present in the natural plant, or unidentified compounds that are active or act additively/synergistically, ingestion of preparations of real plants is still better than a pill.

/Nice try, big pharma//Why don't you get working on treatments for MRSA?

That's very true, but on the flip side if one or more cannabinoids in particular can be found to treat certain conditions, they could be isolated and cater to various things. For example, the chemicals that help glaucoma may not be the same ones that aid in appetite stimulant. There may even be some chemicals that thwart the ability of the plant to treat various conditions, and the patient may well be better off without them.

nekom:vpb:Yes, but I thought there was a THC pill already on the market. Besides, for some medical conditions the hazard of smoking is kind of irrelevant.

Marinol, I believe. And I agree, in the case of a terminally ill patient, smoke away. But for an otherwise healthy person suffering from glaucoma, non-terminal cancer who need the appetite boost, etc. it's a bit safer. I support both medical and responsible recreational use among adults, but I can't say that smoking any substance is "safe".

Its my understanding that Marinol is only one compound (THC) extracted from the plant, the effects of ingesting/smoking actual marijuana are due to a combination of dozens of compounds, chief among them THC, but also numerous other canniboids. Not to mention if youre nauseous and vomiting from chemo, i dont know how you can be expected to keep a pill down. Yeah smoking anything is bad, but using a vaporizer reduces the nasty stuff by like 85%.

From Wiki:While there has never been a documented human fatality from overdosing on tetrahydrocannabinol or cannabis in its natural form,[87] Marinol can lead to death.[88]

Female cannabis plants contain more than 60 cannabinoids, including cannabidiol (CBD), thought to be the major anticonvulsant that helps multiple sclerosis patients;[89] and cannabichromene (CBC), an anti-inflammatory which may contribute to the pain-killing effect of cannabis.[90]

It takes over one hour for Marinol to reach full systemic effect,[91] compared to seconds or minutes for smoked or vaporized cannabis.[92] Some patients accustomed to inhaling just enough cannabis smoke to manage symptoms have complained of too-intense intoxication from Marinol's predetermined dosages. Many patients have said that Marinol produces a more acute psychedelic effect than cannabis, and it has been speculated that this disparity can be explained by the moderating effect of the many non-THC cannabinoids present in cannabis. For that reason, alternative THC-containing medications based on botanical extracts of the cannabis plant such as nabiximols are being developed. Mark Kleiman, director of the Drug Policy Analysis Program at UCLA's School of Public Affairs said of Marinol, "It wasn't any fun and made the user feel bad, so it could be approved without any fear that it would penetrate the recreational market, and then used as a club with which to beat back the advocates of whole cannabis as a medicine."[93]. United States federal law currently registers dronabinol as a Schedule III controlled substance, but all other cannabinoids remain Schedule I, excepting synthetics like nabilone.[94]

Its ridiculous that the anti pot folks are always like "Oooo, theres no medical benefits, medical marijuana is just a foot in the door for people who want to get high". Well A, so what, and 2, if theres no medicinal uses, why do they synthesize medicine from it?

Psycoholic_Slag:fireclown: No, subby. This story isn't "big pharma gets richer", it is "medical marijuana advocates don't want medicine so much as they want to get high".

You say that like it's a bad thing. Thanks for looking out for my best interests.

I don't mean to. I favor full legalization for recreational use. But I have come to despise the artifice. Every time someone starts going on and on about the amazing medical powers (and total lack of negative effects) of Marijuana, they seem to be stoners. I just want some more honesty in the conversation.

nekom:the chemicals that help glaucoma may not be the same ones that aid in appetite stimulant. There may even be some chemicals that thwart the ability of the plant to treat various conditions, and the patient may well be better off without them.

With a vape, you can adjust the temps to achieve this. There is some published research about what temperatures do what. Higher temps help with nausea and sleep for example.

JackieRabbit:nekom: Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

No, this isn't true. Marijuana smoke does not cause cancer, heart disease or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Not a single case of any of these smoking related-disease has ever been linked to marijuana use. A few studies have found some minor airway changes in the lungs after years of heavy pot smoking, but these changes are fully reversible. Quite to the contrary, marijuana is a mild bronchodilator, which can help asthmatics breath easier without the cardiovascular side effects.

Even if JackieRabbit wasn't correct, you could just use a vaporizer to eliminate any concerns with smoking.They are so mainstream now that Gizmodo and other gadget blogs regularly review them.

fireclown:No, subby. This story isn't "big pharma gets richer", it is "medical marijuana advocates don't want medicine so much as they want to get high".

See, there are two sides the marijuana prohibition argument. One side must work as hard as they can to find and cling to any shreds of factual information they can find or re-position in such as way as to lend credence to their position because the other side's primary tactic is to stick fingers in their ears, call them hippies and chant "NANANANANANA CAN'T HEAR YOU". The medical angle was very much just a foothold that was required to even begin a debate on the substance. Now that there is some traction the opposing side is slowly being pushed into a position where simply refusing to acknowledge the arugment isn't going to work anymore.

Kibbler:JackieRabbit: nekom: Not that I disagree with the point about corporate profits, but wouldn't a pill containing the same chemical that helps certain conditions (be that THC, CBD or whathaveyou) be a safer alternative? I mean, let's not live in fantasy land here, smoking anything IS unhealthy.

No, this isn't true. Marijuana smoke does not cause cancer, heart disease or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Not a single case of any of these smoking related-disease has ever been linked to marijuana use. A few studies have found some minor airway changes in the lungs after years of heavy pot smoking, but these changes are fully reversible. Quite to the contrary, marijuana is a mild bronchodilator, which can help asthmatics breath easier without the cardiovascular side effects.

Smoking it used to make my heart pound at an alarming rate, and make my ears ring. I was young so I ignored it, naturally. I wouldn't touch it now, if it were legal.

I think the stuff should be legal, but any drug has its dangers.

/flame away

No need for flaming. MJ can increase the heart rate. This is because THC is a mild vasodilator. The blood vessels dilate, blood pressure falls a bit and the heart rate goes up to compensate. The side effect is more pronounced in some people and after smoking potent strains of the plant.

If the proponents of medical marijuana (one of which I happen to be) are serious about using it for pain management, they will welcome this study, as smoking anything presents a risk to the lungs and other respiratory organs that tablets will avoid.

However, if governments and drug companies are serious about pain relief and not just controlling marijuana, they will acknowledge that some users, suffering from nausea, for example, will find a pill unacceptable and still need to smoke it.

We'll know the true motives of both sides by how this debate shapes up as research progresses.

argylez:nekom: the chemicals that help glaucoma may not be the same ones that aid in appetite stimulant. There may even be some chemicals that thwart the ability of the plant to treat various conditions, and the patient may well be better off without them.

With a vape, you can adjust the temps to achieve this. There is some published research about what temperatures do what. Higher temps help with nausea and sleep for example.

/vapes help you dial in on these

That's interesting. I am aware of vaporizers but it never occurred to me that the temperature can be tuned in. But even still, you aren't getting absolutely pure compounds, you're getting whatever mix gets taken in at a specific heat.

Again, I have nothing against even recreational use, so I'm certainly not knocking anyone who smokes or eats it medically or for shiats and giggles, just saying that it MIGHT be better to have exact doses of specific compounds to aid specific medical conditions.